I have mixed feelings about this text. I really liked what it tried to achieve. There is undoubtedly a distinct lack of these kinds of narratives. As someone who prefers an apolitical, non-organisational approach to anarchy, I'd definitely like to see more of these.
But this 'speculative history'/'critical fabulation' is in my ignorant opinion a terribly terrible approach. The first third was so cringe! The swerfy-ness of it ('She was no prostitute!'). The seemingly self-unaware use -- and worse, the fetishisation -- of the flaneur trope was so lazy and so icky. Can we (and by 'we' I really mean the academia), for once, not look at everything slightly bohemian through the frames of 1870s Paris?? How is this not a form of colonialism? And all those fucking projections and idealisations -- UGH. And then, suddenly, Esther Brown disappears and we get a whole new set of characters to make this messy piece of writing even more confusing.
Anyway, to answer OP's question, no I don't think one needs to explicitly identify as an anarchist and support that by brandishing an appropriate flag, slogans and a club card. Anti-work, relationship anarchy and a revolt against one's subjugation are as anarchist as capitalism/state allows them to be.
I have mixed feelings about…
I have mixed feelings about this text. I really liked what it tried to achieve. There is undoubtedly a distinct lack of these kinds of narratives. As someone who prefers an apolitical, non-organisational approach to anarchy, I'd definitely like to see more of these.
But this 'speculative history'/'critical fabulation' is in my ignorant opinion a terribly terrible approach. The first third was so cringe! The swerfy-ness of it ('She was no prostitute!'). The seemingly self-unaware use -- and worse, the fetishisation -- of the flaneur trope was so lazy and so icky. Can we (and by 'we' I really mean the academia), for once, not look at everything slightly bohemian through the frames of 1870s Paris?? How is this not a form of colonialism? And all those fucking projections and idealisations -- UGH. And then, suddenly, Esther Brown disappears and we get a whole new set of characters to make this messy piece of writing even more confusing.
Anyway, to answer OP's question, no I don't think one needs to explicitly identify as an anarchist and support that by brandishing an appropriate flag, slogans and a club card. Anti-work, relationship anarchy and a revolt against one's subjugation are as anarchist as capitalism/state allows them to be.